Disclaimer: We are not attorneys and don’t pretend to be. The information presented here relies primarily on information available through public records. We are not responsible for documentation from government entities and other public sources which may be incomplete and/or inaccurate.

College of DuPage – Breuder claims Hamilton threatened safety of Board Member

A recent document obtained through a FOIA request to COD sheds more light on Breuder and his misrepresentations to the media as well as ignorance to the law.

An e-mail sent to Bruce Dold of the Chicago Tribune dated September 5th, 2014 reflects numerous concerning statements by Breuder that we will break down individually for a better perspective of how flawed Brueder’s thinking really is.

“The basis for the censure resolution is clear. She was censured for her unprofessional conduct.”

How special it is for Robert Brueder to claim trustee Hamilton’s conduct was unprofessional, all while the night of the censure Breuder fed his face at the Waterleaf on the taxpayer dime. More ironic is that an employee thinks it is OK to speak in such a manner about one of his bosses – yes, he has bosses, and is not the 5-star general of the college. Also of interest on this topic is that communications now confirm Hamilton was not provided a copy of the censure in advance nor provided any statutory authority for such a censure even though it was requested. It is no surprise that no authority was cited because there is none. The very act of censuring a board member is the real example of unprofessional conduct.

“You cannot, for example, be allowed to threaten the safety of another Board member. What does it say when I now have campus police meet/escort Chairman Birt whenever she visits the campus?”

Breuder’s insinuation is that Hamilton threatened the safety of Erin Birt, which is absolutely false. In fact, let’s quote Erin Birt on this matter. At the 2hr, 11 minute mark of the July 17th board meeting Erin Birt admitted to her previous DUI that she had failed to disclose when asked by the media. As part of her comments she stated: “I personally don’t feel threatened” (video link here)

So when the very person Breuder claims needs police protection has stated she personally does not feel threatened, who are we to believe? Is this not yet another example of Breuder’s manipulation of the facts as a means of attacking the sole trustee willing to speak out against his Napoleon style tactics?

We have observed this conduct from other boards we have visited, they claim they feel threatened and use police to drive that point home, when reality is they are using police as an intimidation tactic against the people – not as protection for themselves. Why else would he have upwards of a dozen uniformed officers at meetings?

Now we do find that at the 2:27:37 mark of the video in question, Birt makes a point to tell the board about a comment Hamilton made to her, which was” “What goes around comes around”.

Birt stated she took that as a threat. Now anyone that listens to that exchange is smart enough to see that such a comment was not a threat on a person’s “safety”. Ironically, Hamilton’s words have proven true as now Birt is the outcast on this Board and no longer Chairman while Hamilton’s courage in standing up to thugs has led to her now being the Chairman, which shows in fact that what goes around does come around.

“And texting during a public meeting is public information which Trustee Hamilton refuses to release. Why? This is a violation of the Open Meetings Act”

Once again the people must educated Dr. Breuder as once again he fails to know the law on the matter in which he attempts to discredit one of his bosses.

Texting during a public meeting, either receiving or sending, is not a violation of the Open Meetings act. In fact, any elected official could sit in a meeting and receive or send text messages or emails and it does not violate OMA. Nor does that same trustee refusing to turn over such texts or emails violate OMA.

Once again Breuder misrepresents the truth in his personal crusade to discredit the one board member holding him accountable.

Had Breuder pointed to the Freedom of Information Act as part of his rant he might have garnered a smidgen of support but the truth of the matter is, the very texts he claims Hamilton would not turn over were personal texts that did not contain public business. She is not obligated to turn over such material, no matter when it was sent or received. His insinuation that she violated the law are baseless, but that should not surprise anyone considering the source.

“Trustee Hamilton abandoned her duties as Vice Chair and now wants any Board business to be run through her attorney. Is this reflective of professional behavior?”

If such an accusation had any merit, Hamilton should be charged with official misconduct, which is a felony crime. That is the charge when a public official abandons their duties. However that is not the case with Hamilton and we all know it. Her duties are to represent the taxpayers and by all indications she was one of the few doing so during all this turmoil created by the now famous $20 Million dollar e-mail Breuder sent.

As far as Hamilton’s board business ran through her attorney, any public official can hire an attorney to review actions of their duties as an extra step of caution, which considering the conflicts of the then board attorneys, her doing so was probably a smart move and most would agree was in fact representing true professional behavior, unlike the very letter Breuder sent to the Chicago Tribune.

“We have published and Board approved core values: Integrity, Honesty, Respect and Responsibility. Everyone connected with College of DuPage is expected to behave consistent with those values. No exceptions.”

Now if this is not the pot calling the kettle black I don’t know what is. Breuder has no integrity when he uses public funds for his personal purchases. Doing so is clearly a dishonest act in the eyes of most people. As far as respect, how can you respect a person that misrepresents the truth consistently and violates our laws for their own gain? And the last core value he cites? Responsibility! I think the voters spoke loud and clear during the last COD election and those votes were cast as a clear message that Breuder was not being responsible, and must be held responsible for all his wrong doing.

Yes, the very pillars Breuder insinuates board members should be held accountable too fails to recognize that he is the person failing to meet those very values.

Maybe his own words can be used against him in his firing that is sure come.

We applaud the Chicago Tribune staff and editorial board for their coverage of the facts at COD and compliment them for not falling into the Breuder trap of misrepresentations of which he has become such a master of.

I encourage everyone to read the letter from Breuder and research the facts of the matter and judge for yourself as to whether or not this very letter was nothing more than an attempt to deflect his faults onto a board member.

“Editorials are opinions. I believe they should be predicated on all the facts with no bias. If I thought we were way off the mark, good judgment argues for me to let this pass with no further comment rather than keep it alive.”

Good grief. What goes on in this man’s head? An opinion is a bias’d point of view. That is what makes it different than a fact. To say an opinion should be made without bias, is basically saying that we should be a nation of wishy-washy people with a permanent residence on the fence.